THE SHAPE OF WATER (2017) Review: A Masterpiece that I Wish I Liked More

When I first saw the trailer of “The Shape of
Water”, I was blown away. It was sweet, heartwarming, and weird at the same
time. It is a fantasy love story with a premise that might have so often appeared
in one film or another: an unlikely romance between human and non-human. This is
actually a typical premise background for director Guillermo del Toro, who is
so dedicated and obsessed to monsters and fantasy creatures on films. But “The
Shape of Water” seemed different: there’s a nuance of classic in the trailer,
something to do with old songs and bleak color pallete. And Sally Hawkins (!),
as a mute lady in love with the creature, is a perfect round-up that leads me
into an overanticipation towards this film.

Alas, I didn’t learn enough to realize that
overanticipation, most of the times, results in dissapointment. In the case of “The
Shape of Water”, it kind of rings true.

The setting and the characters are all perfect.
It was in the 1960s, a time of Cold War between USA and Russia. Elisa Esposito
(Sally Hawkins), who is the mute lady I mentioned before, works as a janitor
with Zelda (Octavia Spencer) in a secret research facility owned by the US
government. One day, both of them were instructed to clean the laboratory where
a ‘most sensitive asset ever to be housed in the facility’ was kept: an
amphibian man (Doug Jones) that kind of reminded us to Abe Sapien of “Hellboy”.
This creature was strictly supervised by Colonel Richard Strickland (Michael
Shannon) and Professor Robert Hoffstetler (Michael Stuhlbarg): Colonel Strickland
is more of a violent man who often abuses the creature, while Professor Hoffstetler
with his science background is more patient and protective to it. Although considered
a secret, the laboratory was easily accessed by the janitors. In her curiosity,
Elisa tried to interact with the creature. However, this interaction eventually
becomes a romantic relationship between them, leading to a mission to escape
the creature out of the facility.

You can tell from the first scenes that,
although (like I said) the premise have been so often used in many other films
before, “The Shape of Water” is not just another fantasy love story. From the appearance
only, “The Shape of Water” is already a unique, swoon-worthy film with nods to classic
musical films, intelligently provoked by Alexandre Desplat’s swinging score and
Dan Laustsen striking shots. But deeper than just the appearance, “The Shape of
Water” is about the universality of love. I really praise how director
Guillermo del Toro (who also wrote the screenplay for the film with Vanessa
Taylor) translated ‘love’ to be both ‘freeing’ and ‘sensual’. There is this
bold comparison between Elisa, who struggled to get the creature out of the
facility, and Giles (Richard Jenkins), who is a gay-closeted old man living
next door: one was striving for her love, while the other was just giving in. To
make it all more vivid, del Toro didn’t mind to flesh out the sexual aspect of this
love theme. Even in the first few minutes of the film, we can see our leading
female character fully naked, masturbating in her bathtub as a part of her
daily routine. Remember as well how Elisa and the creature’s first interaction
was through a boiled egg (Elisa’s meal), it may also be seen as a strong
symbolism of the sexual perspective of love.

All of these subtexts will never be truly
established without the power of the cast. Sally Hawkins gave yet another
sublime performance in “The Shape of Water”. Despite her shy persona
off-screen, I think she is one of the working actresses today who always keeps
on upping her own game on-screen. Portraying a mute character in this film, she
just did everything so beautifully with her careful gestures and saying-it-all facial
expressions. There is this edgy kind of beauty that only she owns, and that
really adds up to the Beauty-and-the-Beast nuance of the film (she’s the ‘Beauty’,
of course!). The rest of the cast is just okay—I mean they are all just sufficient
for their parts. Richard Jenkins is wonderful, as always, and he really lived
up as a comparison to Elisa in terms of the striving-for-love subtheme. I
actually worried with Octavia Spencer, who in this film portrayed just another
African-American working wife with all her stereotypes. I mean, I don’t want
her to be a stereotyped actress! (I think in “Snowpiercer” she did quite an
amazing job for a small but challenging role unlike most roles she did before).
Michael Shannon is just a perfect villain with his violent and uncompromosing
character, while Michael Stuhlbarg, well, just did another Stuhlbargian role he
might be destined to.

Up until this paragraph you may all question, “Well,
with such praises like this, how could ‘The Shape of Water’ disappoint you,
Akbar?” Here’s the part I’ll answer such question. You know, I try to visit
this film the second time to prove if it all just because of my own
overanticipation or this film really lacks something in some way. And I think I
prefer the latter. While “The Shape of Water” did a really amazing job to hype
up its subtexts, it does not run so well in terms of its main plot. I hate how
the plot tried to pull the ‘usual thriller tricks’ around its second half. The
characters were becoming so grunt and less reliable, and timing has become such
an important amunition. I mean… it all just became so staged. The part starting
from the actual release of the creature out of the facility into its natural
habitat is really where everything becomes kind of spoiled so recklessly. Well
I think it’s okay if the director wants to create some magical moments to make
us feel emotional or whatever, but for me personally it kind of did the
opposite.

So, yeah... that’s it. “The Shape of Water” is the
masterpiece. Maybe it does not fulfil my own expectation, but perhaps it does
for you. I wish it just went less formulaic, and I really wish I liked it more.
Of course it is not bad at all, it just could do a little bit better. And still,
you should really see this film. Try to see it between the lines and you’ll be
surprised what a rich and beautiful film “The Shape of Water” is. Despite all
those minor flaws, we should really thank Guillermo del Toro for bringing out
his ideas about monsters and non-human creatures, and reshaping them into an
art form that is so close and so relevant to our reality and humanity.